Page 2 of 2

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Posted: 25 Mar 2018, 08:06
by Boxing Writer
jamamb wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 17:13 just wondering, is it some type of psychological bias? seems almost exclusively used for black fighters.

a guy like lomachenko has excellent speed, agility, timing, etc. yet i hear athletic far more to describe a guy like wilder, who tbf id say fits that bill

manny pac in his prime was ultra quick and explosive and could put together ridiculous rapid fire combos. could bounce around swiftly too.

and then guys like george groves and saunders are fast and snappy, with there punches and movements, and seem to have sharp reflexes. yet a guy like eubank was considered the athletic one.

linares too.....fast and agile


yet 'very althetic' 'natural athlete' 'athleticism' seem like qualities that are almost exclusively assigned to black fighters, as if only they have them
Loma's biggest asset is his skills, his footwork, his ring IQ. Pacquiao's biggest assets aside of his speed were combination punching and in-out movement. Linares is skilled fighter who can throw great combinations etc. For Wilder athleticism is by far his biggest asset after his power.

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Posted: 25 Mar 2018, 08:24
by jamamb
loma has very good speed hmself and reflexes and agility

lnares has very good hand speed and moves well and reacts fast. he explodes wth very fast multi punch combos in a way few do.

pac was super fast and just all together a gifted physcal beast. what athletic qualtes was he missng that a guy such as deontay has other then nba height?


all these guys have excellent athletic (usually appled to thngs such as speed and reflexes etc) stregnths. but somehow for non blac guys such as them you see thngs phrased dfferently as though they arent partcularly athletc and only black fghters are.

wasnt a wlder thread btw...you can use other examples. man those charlos/thurman/russell/aj are so athletic etc. but no - loma pac etc arent/werent. or at least relatively few mentons it

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Posted: 25 Mar 2018, 08:47
by Counter-puncher
I think you're overstating it with PAC. People referred to his speed all the time. I used the word 'physicality' on numerous occasions to describe him at his peak. Perhaps the word athletic wasn't used, and perhaps it's most often used for black fighters but i think there's something else going on.

I think it's most often used for fighters, as i think someone else has implied, where there isn't much to talk about apart from athleticism, guys like Judah or Jermaine Taylor. So it's valid, really, as it's the primary or only real advantage in their skill set. Whereas Loma or Linares have very extensive skill sets to refer to beyond their athletic gifts.

Actually Dorticos is a good example here. I remember saying he would be a bit faster than Gassiev, and you mocked the idea I think, like people only say he's a good athlete because he's black and Gassiev was just as fast. Actually I think their fight showed the dichotomy perfectly, Dorticos is athletic but very very flawed in some fundamentals, so it's fair enough to refer to him largely in terms of that athleticism, in how well he is able to move for a man his size. Better athlete than Gassiev and that athleticism alone is what allowed him to win early rounds and get to the later ones- as a stationary target Gassiev would have chopped him up in short order.

Take Leonard, or Mayweather, obviously as fast and 'athletically' gifted as any fighter described in those terms, but most often people talk about them in terms of skill or talent rather than being 'good athletes'.

In fact in Mayweathers case I actually think some of the things he was able to do only because of his great athleticism- how he could dart in with a jab to the body and out again without getting hit- we're still talked of as an instance of his skills.

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Posted: 25 Mar 2018, 08:51
by jamamb
say what....you got that from dort-gass? almost all dorts rounds won (not very many to me) were on the front foot early in the fght just throwng more as gass had a look. he wasnt movng really that well at all. gass mo ved much better around the ring and had dort chasng largely neffectvely i thought. ddnt really see dort as faster handed ether. gass exploded with the combos faster then dort was. gass was the explosve one not dort and he landed much better. dorts shots could be seen coming partally because they werent that fast.

please refer me to what ths superor athletscm and spped and movement from dort was and where during the fght it can be seen. maybe ill watch again.

but were that the case ...does it suggest a relatve lac of skill from black fghters if ppl go to athletscm more wth them because of less skill?